If you're okay with a tunnel, you may want to check out http://bgp.services.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:36 AM John Palmer wrote:
> I've got a Cisco 881 with the "Advanced IP features" This will do for what
> I'm
> trying to accomplish.
>
> I think I'm going to go with a BGP tunnel.
>
> No one at
I've got a Cisco 881 with the "Advanced IP features" This will do for what I'm
trying to accomplish.
I think I'm going to go with a BGP tunnel.
No one at RCN has any clue about this - they may not even provide the server.
The sales
droids only know how to sell their pre-packaged plans.
Does
They are obviously not running full tables on their 3640. I'd imagine a
raspberry pi would have more BGP capability and throughput than a 3640,
though I don't recommend doing that even as a joke. But an ERR would be
fine if they're expecting nothing more than a slightly faster 3640 with
maybe
Ubiquiti's EdgeRouter Lite is equipped with 512 MiB of DDR2 memory, of which
after startup, roughly 491 MiB can be utilized. 119 MiB of the remaining memory
are allocated by the base of the router already, which leaves you with a
remainder of 372 MiB memory. Memory usage depends on the
On 9/3/2019 1:54 PM, Florian Brandstetter wrote:
I don't see full tables happening from a memory perspective on the
EdgeRouter Lite, you would want to look at something with at least 2 GiB
of memory to keep the whole system running smoothly, and when using
Quagga and Zebra, that's still aimed
I will note that Comcast will do BGP on their enterprise fiber circuits.
Comcast DIA (which they call EDI) comes in increments of 1M up to 10M, then
10M up to 100M, etc. So you could get 10M or 80M (not sure if "10MB/Sec"
means 10Mbps or 80MBps) and do BGP over that, if it's available. RCN is
On 9/3/2019 12:19 PM, Matt Harris wrote:
But even the higher-end Ubiquiti EdgeRouter series products can handle
full tables if you understand and accept their limitations in doing so
if budget is a huge concern but you still need to take full tables.
As long as you stick with the 1.10.10
I’ve had BGP from comcast business in River North before, not sure what their
minimum bandwidth is for that. Tunnels may be simplest at that bandwidth level.
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Florian Brandstetter via NANOG
> wrote:
>
> Might be worth to consider running a software router on that
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 12:44 PM ADNS NetBSD List Subscriber
wrote:
>
> Also, we’d like to ditch our 3640 router in favor of a smaller “desktop”
> size router, but none of them seem to do BGP (not surprising). Any
> recommendations on hardware would be welcome as well
>
I can think of lots of
Might be worth to consider running a software router on that scale with perhaps
some cheap quad-port GbE PCIe NICs. BIRD would be the BGP daemon to go, or
FRRouting if you want an integrated shell. Hardware routers for 100 Mbit egress
seem a bit overpowered, however, as scaleable you want to
I have a need for a BGP enabled connection in the River North section of
Chicago. We have a small number of IP blocks that we want to use. Currently, we
have some equipment at 350 E. Cermak (Steadfast Networks) and are looking at
downsizing and bringing stuff
in-house. Our bandwidth
11 matches
Mail list logo